## Facts

- After a party, Randy White believed his cell phone was stolen and confronted Joseph Rivera and Rivera’s companions, David Chavez and Gilberto Caldero, in a verbal dispute in which no weapons were displayed.
- White called Aaron Joseph Morrow for a ride.
- Morrow arrived in a car with an AK-47 rifle.
- Morrow fired multiple rounds at Rivera, Chavez, and Caldero; Rivera was killed and another person was injured.
- A grand jury indicted Morrow on multiple counts, including first-degree premeditated murder and attempted first-degree premeditated murder.
- At trial, the State introduced (1) graphic crime-scene and autopsy photographs and (2) a childhood photograph of Rivera with Chavez; the court admitted the childhood photo with a caution that it not be used to generate sympathy.
- A jury convicted Morrow; the court entered judgments of conviction for first-degree premeditated murder and two counts of attempted first-degree premeditated murder, imposing a life sentence plus consecutive sentences.

## Issues

1. Whether alleged irregularities in the grand-jury process required dismissal of the indictment, including claims that the defendant had a right to testify before the grand jury and that the prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence.
2. Whether admitting a childhood photograph of the victim with a friend was an abuse of discretion because it was unfairly prejudicial “humanizing” evidence.
3. Whether admitting graphic crime-scene/autopsy photographs and related testimony (including about the victim’s physical stature) was unfairly prejudicial under Rule 403.
4. Whether the district court erred by denying defense surrebuttal closing argument after the State’s rebuttal.
5. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove premeditation and to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Decision

- The Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the judgments of conviction.
- The court held the indictment was valid and found no basis to invalidate it based on the asserted grand-jury errors.
- The court held the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the childhood photograph; its limited use and probative background value supported admission under Rule 403.
- The court held the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the challenged crime-scene and autopsy photographs and related testimony.
- The court held denial of surrebuttal closing argument was not reversible error.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient to support findings of premeditation and to reject self-defense.

## Legal Principles

- Grand-jury indictments carry a presumption of regularity, and invalidation is uncommon absent concrete, prejudicial irregularity.
- A defendant has no general right to personally testify before a Minnesota grand jury absent rule-based authorization.
- Under Minnesota Rule of Evidence 403, relevant evidence may be excluded only if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice; trial courts receive substantial deference on this balancing.
- “Humanizing” or background evidence about a victim (including photographs) may be admissible when relevant and used in a limited manner; trial courts may mitigate prejudice through limiting directions.
- Graphic crime-scene and autopsy photographs are not inadmissible merely because they are disturbing; admissibility turns on relevance to material issues and Rule 403 balancing.
- Control of closing arguments, including whether to permit surrebuttal, lies within the trial court’s discretion absent unfair surprise or inability to respond.
- On sufficiency review, appellate courts view evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and defer to the jury’s credibility determinations; firing multiple rounds from a high-powered rifle at unarmed individuals after a verbal dispute supported premeditation and negated self-defense.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Morrow’s convictions, concluding that the grand-jury proceedings were not shown to be irregular in a way warranting dismissal, the contested photographs and related testimony were properly admitted under Rule 403, the trial court’s management of closing argument was within its discretion, and the evidence supported premeditation and disproved self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.


State v. Morrow, 834 N.W.2d 715 (Minn. 2013)